At Monarch prices I think not ;)

Sometimes Monarch have some good ideas, then go and ruin it by doing something stupid. Thier onboard product is excellent; allocated seating, extra leg room seats etc... all designed for flights of 4-5hrs in length. So what do they do... launch City routes like Barcelona, Venice, Rome etc, where people are less likely to buy that product.

For me they need to be looking at expansion in Egypt, Morocco, Turkey, Greece and the Canaries, flights of 4-5 hours, to more UK bases, rather than chase easyJet with a more expensive and less flexible product on city routes.

I agree, However there does not appear to much joined up thinking going on at mon at present.

can you explain why you think mon are in a different class:confused: both seem to offer a similar service if you ask me.

Well firstly i have yet to hear of the CAA ever grounding a mon aircraft for not being airworthy, a jet 2 757 was recently, thats not rumour its fact

Secondly ive flown with both operators numerous times with the job and mon are in a without doubt better, the aircraft cabins are in great shape and they appear not to be held together with gaffer tape as jet 2 are, the toilets seem to work as opposed to jet 2 who it seems allways have at least one toilet inop

Thirdly ive yet to suffer a technical delay with monarch and they always appear to leave on schedule, in stark contrast to jet 2 who seem to suffer endless delays, and the on time stats appear to back this up

Finally the on board service is generally of a far higher standard

To sum up, if jet 2 were a town it would be called stockport.

I have no connection with either Jet2 or Monarch, but as Jet2 have just been
awarded "best short haul airline" at the Globe Travel Awards, this would indicate that
all passengers do not share your opinion of Jet2

Be careful with your analogies. Stockport is actually a fairly affluent town.

Jet 2 has had it's fair share of tech delays lets be honest but when things go right (which is the overwhelming majority of the time for most airlines) there is not an awful lot of difference between them and Monarch. Monarch for it's part has an excellent engineering division, it has heritage and relatively good brand awareness in the UK.

But which is currently the strongest carrier? I'd probably say Jet2.

I was shouted down a few pages back for suggesting that Monarch's product is very similar these days to Easyjet. I still believe this to be the case. Easyjet are gradually raising the bar such as by trialling allocated seating, flexi fares and IFE on certain sectors. Meanwhile Monarch has come the other way and pretty much meets Easyjet. Again, not a dig at Monarch as I think the no-frills with add on's was necassary.....Crown Service would never have survived. As it is, Easyjet have also adopted the no-frills with add on's mantra.

Do I think Monarch should be going down the "Cities" road? They've operated MAN-BCN for a number of years but they've pretty much been the only operator on the route and BCN is a very leisure orientated destination which is Monarch's core competence. Indeed, Monarch actually does the leisure routes well. They don't particularly offer anything special or anything to particularly differentiate themselves but they do have brand recognition and, to an extent, a loyal customer base. They don't really have alot of brand awareness down route but with plenty of ex-pats, workers and second home owners in many of these destinations, it's not always needed.

Despite the economic turmoil people seem to be making sure hell freezes over before they sacrafice their main holiday and this should be helping in some way. But the amount of times people fly away on holiday is probably falling and yields are probably taking a battering too. Therefore in theory going down the Cities route where people 'need' to travel, who travel more frequently and tend to pay more for their ticket might not be a bad idea. But again Monarch needs a greater brand awareness and the ability to compete with flag carriers and the Easyjet's of the world.

ha ha ha! oh tospotter how your childish remarks make us all laugh..
of course the caa grounded the damaged 757. but that could have happened to any aircraft at any airline.
inessence your saying that because you've been delayed with jet2 and not monarch blah blah blah, there c**p.
as for stockport its a town much like any other.

Probably a little biased here as I work for Jet2. But here are a couple of observations I've noticed..... I can't remember the last time I got on one of our a/c when a toilet was inop. But this does happen. Are you seriously trying to suggest that Jet2 have 1 inop toilet on each of their a/c? Hum?

I have flown with Monarch in the past and do recall seeing a few cabin 'trim' issues that needed rectifying. Flew on an A300 a couple of years ago to find the fwd toilets inop (not sure if it was actually inop or just for crew convenience), a large section of carpet was missing from the aisle in the mid cabin... maybe 8 rows worth and the other side in the same location there was a large bump/ruffle/trip hazard in the aisle carpet! On another a/c, an A321 I think, the locker above me was taped up with 'gaffer tape' I guess the latch was u/s and all the floor level lights that were mounted in the sides of the seats had ADD stickers on them, I'm not sure if it was on both sides of the aisle or not. The A321 on the return flight seemed tidy and I didn't notice any issues. The thing is, ALL airlines will have little things like this that are carried all the time and Monarch are not immune to these problems either. :ugh:

Er no PH, it couldnt happen to any airline, it could only happen to a airline whos aircraft were deemed to be unsafe because they had not been maintained correctly ,for the CAA to ground a aircraft for not being airworthy is rather a big deal, and reflects very badly upon the operator

I recall that to add insult to injury, the CAA refused to allow Jet 2 to try and rectify the problem and monarch engineers ended up sorting it out.

To be fair I don't think the CAA would mind who did the work as long as it was up to their standards. It may well be the Monarch engineering did the work but I doubt it was under the CAA's stipulation.

I don't know the full details, but I seem to remember that damage had been caused to a door frame due to a door rigging problem. It was a very complicated repair and I believe boeing had to be consulted for a fix. From what I was told, Jet2 simply didn't have experience of this issue to be able to carry out the repair and Monarch was used for their expert knowledge of the 757 instead.

yawn! so the door was broken, and then the door was fixed.
however i fail to see why you big up monarch all the time,they offer very little if any thing at all different to any other holiday/charter/loco airline.

id be a lot more nervous if the caa didnt ground aircraft for safety reasons.
like i said stockport's a town like every other town in the uk.
p.s. derby's hardly the garden of eden,or is it luton you come from this week? either way there just as bad.

This thread is now closed. Too much trolling going one. I have banned one and I will quickly ban others if it occurs again.

Someone can start another Monarch 3 thread with pleasure. Trolls and idiots keep out.

PPP